1

If you do not want to differentiate gender of a person being referred to, for instance in public or legal notices, why is there no single word for the following word pairs?

 (he,she), (him,her), {his,her)

It appears to be a big limitation in many languages...

Jasper
  • 24,268
  • 4
  • 54
  • 86
Narasimham
  • 384
  • 8
  • 15
  • Closely related: 3rd person singular (he or she) – apsillers Jan 14 '15 at 18:49
  • @apsillers: Yes, I wanted to avoid a " nominative noun" in the title. – Narasimham Jan 14 '15 at 18:52
  • 3
    It's somewhat unclear what you are asking. Are you asking why there isn't a gender-neutral 3rd person pronoun? The short answer is English never really developed one. There are some variants which are sometimes used "they" (As singular) or "one" (in limited contexts) – eques Jan 14 '15 at 18:52
  • @eques It is just not in the nominative alone, it carries through into accusative and possessive case declinations. – Narasimham Jan 14 '15 at 18:58
  • English doesn't really have case declination. For pronouns, we can speak of "objective" form or "possessive" form. However, the main point still stands. Your options are "them"/"their" or "one"/"one's", but note that you have to match to what subject pronoun was used. You cannot say "She didn't take one's car" or "He did not finish their homework" – eques Jan 14 '15 at 19:01
  • Their is possessive, them is an object. What is your objection to those forms? They go perfectly fine together with they. – oerkelens Jan 14 '15 at 22:08
  • @oerkelens: Problem comes if you are particularly emphasizing in a certain situation about an individual and want to avail some freedom of using the singular when referring to that individual. – Narasimham Jan 14 '15 at 22:20
  • There is hardly a problem. When a customer enters my store, I ask what their are looking for. Depending on their question, I help them as I can. Pure singular semantically. If you still see a problem, you may want to explain that in more detail by editing your question. – oerkelens Jan 15 '15 at 07:59
  • 1
    It appears since there is no such form workarounds are in use. – Narasimham Jan 15 '15 at 08:09
  • @Narasimham: Yes, that's a good way to describe the situation. – Nate Eldredge Jan 18 '15 at 03:30

1 Answers1

0

To answer your question as to why there is no single word for the pairs, I cannot definitively state. However, I can point out that we are a race that possesses two distinct genders and, for much of human history, has had little need to address audiences with which we were not familiar (thus no need for gender-neutral language).

Adding to this is our system of honorifics. They come in gender-pairs: Duke and Duchess, Baron and Baroness, Mr and Mrs/Miss/Ms, Lord and Lady, etc. Even gender neutral honorifics like "Majesty" still acquire gender-specific nomenclature to assume their various word forms ("What would please His Majesty?" "Does Her Majesty require aid?").

But to bring this back to your second point, the reason that public and legal notices must go with both words is because there is an inherent vagueness that accompanies using words such as they and their to represent people that is unacceptable in some legal contexts.

  • He, she, him and her are singular; they can be singular or plural
  • His and her are singular possessive; their can be singular- or plural-possessive

Take the following examples:

He ate his apple after she ate hers. He shall relinquish his weapon before entering the building. She shall pay for her crime.

vs

They ate their apple (the context of apple points toward singular). They ate their oranges (now the context points to, but does not definitively confirm, plural; one person could be eating many oranges). If someone is caught by the metal detector, they shall be compelled to empty their pockets (again, context is singular). They shall be punished for their crime (without context, both options are just as likely).

Omnidisciplinarianist
  • 2,686
  • 15
  • 26